The UK response to Covid-19 [MOD WARNING 1ST POST]

Donald Trump

RobMc59 wrote: »

Would you think it funny if the Taoiseach got it?

I wouldn't. But then again Leo wasn't faffing around for ages and bragging about shaking hands with everyone. Nor was he ignoring the calls of the WHO etc. pleading with him to take it seriously and not let it spread through the population in an uncontrolled manner, which Johnson was apparently willing to let happen on his watch.

I mean, the average people would be sad to see a random person catch it by accident, but they might be a little less sad if a fella who goes licking toilet seats and posting it on social media to try to get others to do the same, catches it.

RobMc59

Donald Trump wrote: »

So nobody should be tested then right? We can beat the virus by everyone just staying at home if they have symptoms.

Get on the blower there to Michael Ryan and tell him your research findings there Einstein

:rolleyes:


(But of course, Charlie and Boris had to be tested. Even though there was no point testing them, it was worth testing them. I'm sure that Charlie had some urgent business to attend to. Perhaps he was driving the local bus for the rest of the week and didn't want to spread it. lol)

You were devastated when barnier got it yet appear to be revelling in the fact Charles and Johnson have contracted it-shameful attitude.

Donald Trump

RobMc59 wrote: »

You were devastated when barnier got it yet appear to be revelling in the fact Charles and Johnson have contracted it-shameful attitude.

Was I? Really? In what universe? Sure go there and give us an oul' link where I expressed my devastation

Or are ya talking through your hole perchance?

Anyway, I'm just glad for the UK that, as plenty of British posters told us a week or so ago, you had Boris in charge, taking advice of better experts than the WHO, and making the decisions for the UK that were right for the UK. Although some of those posters seem to have disappeared.............

Itsalladdingup

Donald Trump wrote: »

I'd say it's just that those people are getting tested. It wouldn't surprise me if Johnson and his buddies were having tests done every day "just in case" for the past month or more.

Wouldn't you think it would make more sense that because other MP's such as Nadine Dorris has said she has it, that others who displayed symptoms got tested?

Smegging hell

Alarming rise in deaths in the UK today - up by 181 to 759. https://twitter.com/DHSCgovuk/status/1243541321601748993

Donald Trump

Itsalladdingup wrote: »

Wouldn't you think it would make more sense that because other MP's such as Nadine Dorris has said she has it, that others who displayed symptoms got tested?

What you are asking is not what I said. I said it would not surprise me if Johnson was getting tested every day for the past month or so as a matter of routine.

It is probably not something afforded to those nurses working on wards with the corona patients.

You can argue your point with robinph who appears to think that people should not be bothering to get tested even if they have symptoms.

serfboard

Donald Trump wrote: »

You can argue your point with robinph who appears to think that people should not be bothering to get tested even if they have symptoms.

This attitude is staggering.

Of course people should get tested. What do people think "contact tracing" is all about?

The WHO said "test, test, test". Obviously posters on here are better informed than the WHO.

meeeeh

RobMc59 wrote: »

Would you think it funny if the Taoiseach got it?

It would be less ironic because he took it more seriously from beginning.

As I said I don't wish them anything bad but I find it funny in ironic sort of way. Black humour is best type of humor. But keep virtue signalling if it makes you feel better.

meeeeh

Itsalladdingup wrote: »

Hope if you get it, no-one you know thinks its funny.....

Why? I'm well able to laugh at my own misfortunes so why shouldn't others.

Itsalladdingup

Donald Trump wrote: »

What you are asking is not what I said. I said it would not surprise me if Johnson was getting tested every day for the past month or so as a matter of routine.

It is probably not something afforded to those nurses working on wards with the corona patients.

You can argue your point with robinph who appears to think that people should not be bothering to get tested even if they have symptoms.

No. What you actually said was "I'd say it's just that those people are getting tested. It wouldn't surprise me if Johnson and his buddies were having tests done every day "just in case" for the past month or more." and I just said maybe (as they have said) they displayed symptoms and got tested. You and I aren't privy to the testing criteria. And they're Johnson's co-workers, not "buddies". I also think you're jumping on every opinion and looking for a row in it. In an ideal world, we would all be tested, especially our healthcare workers (it would have to be everyday to have any meaning) but sadly it is not an ideal world.

Itsalladdingup

meeeeh wrote: »

Why? I'm well able to laugh at my own misfortunes so why shouldn't others.

Hmm ok right :rolleyes:

meeeeh

Prime minister should be tested and minded. Who here wants Dominic Raab in charge (he is designated sub as far as I know).

Kidchameleon

meeeeh wrote: »

Prime minister should be tested and minded. Who here wants Dominic Raab in charge (he is designated sub as far as I know).

Raab would make a fantastic PM. I had hoped he got the job but Boris has done great either way

Donald Trump

Itsalladdingup wrote: »

No. What you actually said was "I'd say it's just that those people are getting tested. It wouldn't surprise me if Johnson and his buddies were having tests done every day "just in case" for the past month or more." and I just said maybe (as they have said) they displayed symptoms and got tested. You and I aren't privy to the testing criteria. And they're Johnson's co-workers, not "buddies". I also think you're jumping on every opinion and looking for a row in it. In an ideal world, we would all be tested, especially our healthcare workers (it would have to be everyday to have any meaning) but sadly it is not an ideal world.

Eh....the testing criteria in the UK has been well established that they were only testing those bad enough to be hospitalised.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11053953/how-tested-coronavirus-anti-body/

Johnson is/was likely being tested every day. Given that it takes a while for testing to come back, either he was tested while symptomless or he attended public events after developing symptoms.

Not sure what your inclination is with having to jump to his defence at something you perceive as a slight towards the man. There is no need to be so sensitive on his behalf

Donald Trump

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Raab would make a fantastic PM. I had hoped he got the job but Boris has done great either way

What the number of UK deaths for today at?

robinph

Donald Trump wrote: »

What you are asking is not what I said. I said it would not surprise me if Johnson was getting tested every day for the past month or so as a matter of routine.

It is probably not something afforded to those nurses working on wards with the corona patients.

You can argue your point with robinph who appears to think that people should not be bothering to get tested even if they have symptoms.

Who has said that people shouldn't get tested (although there is an argument to avoid the mass testing of the entire population when you still need them to comply with staying indoors)?

What I've asked you is what you would do with the results of having been tested? What change would it make to your treatment?

Other than being able to show your employer the results to get sick pay, which isn't required under the current situation, there is no benefit for someone sat at home with mild symptoms for two weeks in knowing one way or the other.

More testing is good, but as it is limited in how many tests can be done it makes sense to do it where it is most useful. More tests for NHS staff so that they can get back to work, but the general population gains nothing by knowing the cause of their mild cough.

Donald Trump

robinph wrote: »

Who has said that people shouldn't get tested (although there is an argument to avoid the mass testing of the entire population when you still need them to comply with staying indoors)?

What I've asked you is what you would do with the results of having been tested? What change would it make to your treatment?

Other than being able to show your employer the results to get sick pay, which isn't required under the current situation, there is no benefit for someone sat at home with mild symptoms for two weeks in knowing one way or the other.

More testing is good, but as it is limited in how many tests can be done it makes sense to do it where it is most useful. More tests for NHS staff so that they can get back to work, but the general population gains nothing by knowing the cause of their mild cough.

lol. G'way outta that with your shifting goalposts

You said there was no treatment.

I just pointed out that there are hospitals full of people being treated.

And I also posted the link of a story of a poor lady in Italy who died in her bed, presumably from Covid19. She wasn't tested (against Michael Ryan's advice but as per robinph's) and got no treatment

robinph

Donald Trump wrote: »

lol. G'way outta that with your shifting goalposts

You said there was no treatment.

I just pointed out that there are hospitals full of people being treated.

And I also posted the link of a story of a poor lady in Italy who died in her bed, presumably from Covid19. She wasn't tested (against Michael Ryan's advice but as per robinph's) and got no treatment

OK, using multiple definitions of treatment cause confusion. I'll give you that. But there isn't a vaccine or cure other than some people get better and some people don't. As far as I'm aware treatment consists of keeping them alive until their immune system can handle it itself.

But if someone is in hospital and has a lung infection and needs to go on a ventilator then what do they do? Wait until they have a test for Covid19 before putting them on a ventilator?
Or do they just stick them on a ventilator?
Do you not get a ventilator unless you have Covid 19?

You've mentioned the person in Italy a couple of times. You've yet to explain how knowing that she had Covid19 would have changed anything though. She didn't receive treatment due to the system being overloaded, not because she didn't get a test.

Have to be honest, when I heard on the news that Boris tested positive, I did laugh. Even his commentary on it sounds so defeated.

It's funny because he's been openly rolling his eyes at the whole thing and talking about herd immunity, then he almost immediately catches it and has to isolate.

It is a funny twist. He's not an 80 year old with asthma. He'll be grand. He even said himself his symptoms were mild. People are making it out that if you laugh at the ironic nature of it you're practically wishing death on him. :rolleyes:

robinph

People seem to be under the impression that getting a test will somehow cure them of the virus.

It is useful on a national and global basis to be testing as much as possible so that patterns can be identified and dealt with. It is pretty much pointless on an individual basis though and from a treatment of the individual perspective doesn't tell you anything useful other than you potentially being immune after you've recovered.

Donald Trump

robinph wrote: »

OK, using multiple definitions of treatment cause confusion. I'll give you that. But there isn't a vaccine or cure other than some people get better and some people don't. As far as I'm aware treatment consists of keeping them alive until their immune system can handle it itself.

But if someone is in hospital and has a lung infection and needs to go on a ventilator then what do they do? Wait until they have a test for Covid19 before putting them on a ventilator?
Or do they just stick them on a ventilator?
Do you not get a ventilator unless you have Covid 19?

You've mentioned the person in Italy a couple of times. You've yet to explain how knowing that she had Covid19 would have changed anything though. She didn't receive treatment due to the system being overloaded, not because she didn't get a test.

What do you want me to do? How many examples do I need to post here before you get it into your head that testing is important.

https://news.yahoo.com/louisiana-death-comes-coronavirus-test-141705045.html

There is a lady who was not tested in time and died without your excuse of an overloaded system.

paleoperson

robinph wrote: »

People seem to be under the impression that getting a test will somehow cure them of the virus.

It is useful on a national and global basis to be testing as much as possible so that patterns can be identified and dealt with. It is pretty much pointless on an individual basis though and from a treatment of the individual perspective doesn't tell you anything useful other than you potentially being immune after you've recovered.

What a stupid post.

If you don't get a test they won't give you priority and move you to the ventilators, you won't be treated properly.

robinph

Donald Trump wrote: »

What do you want me to do? How many examples do I need to post here before you get it into your head that testing is important.

https://news.yahoo.com/louisiana-death-comes-coronavirus-test-141705045.html

There is a lady who was not tested in time and died without your excuse of an overloaded system.

But again, what would have happened differently with a positive result? She would presumably still have been told to isolate at home and call an ambulance if things got worse. Seems that in this case the symptoms progressed quicker than expected, but I don't see what having got a positive test two days before when she was still coping at home would have changed.

splinter65

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Have to be honest, when I heard on the news that Boris tested positive, I did laugh. Even his commentary on it sounds so defeated.

It's funny because he's been openly rolling his eyes at the whole thing and talking about herd immunity, then he almost immediately catches it and has to isolate.

It is a funny twist. He's not an 80 year old with asthma. He'll be grand. He even said himself his symptoms were mild. People are making it out that if you laugh at the ironic nature of it you're practically wishing death on him. :rolleyes:

Anyone who laughs at the news of any other human contracting a deadly disease is a poor, sick minded freak. “It is a funny twist”? Are you mentally ill?!?

circadian

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Raab would make a fantastic PM. I had hoped he got the job but Boris has done great either way

Hold on, you're being serious?

robinph

paleoperson wrote: »

What a stupid post.

If you don't get a test they won't give you priority and move you to the ventilators, you won't be treated properly.

Why wouldn't they?

If you need a ventilator then you need a ventilator regardless of the cause of needing the ventilator. They are used for things other than just Coronavirus patients.

Donald Trump

robinph wrote: »

But again, what would have happened differently with a positive result? She would presumably still have been told to isolate at home and call an ambulance if things got worse. Seems that in this case the symptoms progressed quicker than expected, but I don't see what having got a positive test two days before when she was still coping at home would have changed.

We understand you don't see the difference. But that is just you. There is nothing we can do about that unfortunately except to keep pointing out to you that you are wrong.

robinph

Donald Trump wrote: »

We understand you don't see the difference. But that is just you. There is nothing we can do about that unfortunately except to keep pointing out to you that you are wrong.

OK, then please enlighten us as to what would have happened differently with a positive result two days earlier when they were still coping at home?

RobMc59

Donald Trump wrote: »

We understand you don't see the difference. But that is just you. There is nothing we can do about that unfortunately except to keep pointing out to you that you are wrong.

You should calm down donald,you've got yourself quite excited about the news about Johnson,one would almost describe it as gloating..

Peregrinus

robinph wrote: »

People seem to be under the impression that getting a test will somehow cure them of the virus.

It is useful on a national and global basis to be testing as much as possible so that patterns can be identified and dealt with. It is pretty much pointless on an individual basis though and from a treatment of the individual perspective doesn't tell you anything useful other than you potentially being immune after you've recovered.

Testing in itself has no therapeutic benefits - no diagnostic procedure does.

But that doesn't mean they are useless. As you point out, it's useful on an epemiological level for mapping the progress of the disease, identifying clusters, detecting vectors of transmission, etc. This is vital in the effort to combat the the disease, and all the more successful strategies have involved large amounts of testing.

On the individual level, the sooner you know you're infected the sooner you can enter the degree of quarantine that will prevent transmission, and the earlier you can get on with the contact tracing that will (hopefull) prevent further transmission of the disease through people you may already have infected. You should care about this because the people who are most at risk here include people who are close to you.

In due course, as more effective treatments for CV19 are developed, testing will lead to therapeutic benefits, since it will be the gateway to CV19-specific treatments. This isn't a factor just yet, as there are currently no established CV19-specific treatments.